"The object of the flesh is death, since those whose lives are governed by the flesh follow the flesh in their objectives; and the object of the flesh is hostility to God, for it is not subject to God’s Law. Those who live on the level of flesh cannot please God" should not be understood as some people lay down, but as I have already argued. Then in distinction from these people, he addresses the Church. "You are not living by the flesh but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God is dwelling in you. Anyone without Christ’s Spirit is not of him. But if Christ is in you, then your body is a dead thing because of sin, but the Spirit is life through righteousness. So, brothers, we are in debt. Not to the flesh, to follow it in our lives; for if you follow the flesh in the way you live, you are on the way to death. But if by the Spirit you put to death the practices of the body, you will live. For all who are guided by God’s Spirit are sons of God."
A reference to Romans 8:15 immediately follows in the Stromata so Clement's text of Romans thus must be understood to read:
τὸ γὰρ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς θάνατος, ὅτι οἱ κατὰ σάρκα ζῶντες τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς φρονοῦσιν, καὶ τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς ἔχθρα εἰς θεόν εἰ δέ τις πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει, οὗτος οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῦ. εἰ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, τὸ μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν δι' ἁμαρτίαν, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ζωὴ διὰ δικαιοσύνην. ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, ὀφειλέται ἐσμέν, οὐ τῇ σαρκὶ τοῦ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆν. εἰ γὰρ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆτε, μέλλετε ἀποθνῄσκειν· εἰ δὲ πνεύματι τὰς πράξεις τοῦ σώματος θανατοῦτε, ζήσεσθε. ὅσοι γὰρ πνεύματι θεοῦ ἄγονται, οὗτοί εἰσιν υἱοὶ θεοῦ. οὐ γὰρ ἐλάβετε πνεῦμα δουλείας πάλιν εἰς φόβον, ἀλλὰ ἐλάβετε πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας, ἐν ᾧ κράζομεν· ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ
There are two difficulties with this text which must be noted. The first is the reference highlighted in red:
ὅτι οἱ κατὰ σάρκα ζῶντες τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς φρονοῦσιν
The first part of the citation - κατὰ σάρκα ζῶντες - is actually found in a fragment of the Epistle to the Romans, only here it appears at 8:1:
οὐδὲν ἄρα κατάκριμα νῦν τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. ἀποδείξας γὰρ ὅτι οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον ὄντες, ἅτε δὴ κατὰ σάρκα ζῶντες, ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν εἰσὶ καὶ κατάκριμα, ἐπήγαγεν ὅτι οἱ ὑπὸ Χριστὸν ὄντες οὐκ εἰσὶν ὑπὸ κατάκριμα, ἐπειδὴ μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν.
Our received text simply reads:
Οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, μὴ κατὰ σάρχα περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα.
It is worth noting that a reference in a cantena makes a similar reference to this line "καὶ γὰρ ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους τοῦ νόμου μνημονεύων καὶ τῆς διὰ τοῦ κυρίου διορθώσεως εἰσήγαγεν, τὸ οἱ γὰρ κατὰ σάρκα ζῶντες θεῷ ἀρέσαι οὐ δύνανται."
The second - and related point - is the manner in which Clement's text of Romans here clearly omits a large amount of material. Given that it is a continuous citation (i.e. Clement is recording the whole section) it is hard to argue that for instance Romans 8:11 was ever part of his canon:
τὸ γὰρ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς θάνατος·τὸ δὲ φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος ζωὴ καὶ εἰρήνη· 7 διότι τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς ἔχθρα εἰς Θεόν, τῷ γὰρ νόμῳ τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐχ ὑποτάσσεται, οὐδὲ γὰρ δύναται· 8 οἱ δὲ ἐν σαρκὶ ὄντες Θεῷ ἀρέσαι οὐ δύνανται. 9 ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν σαρκὶ, ἀλλὰ ἐν πνεύματι, εἴπερ Πνεῦμα Θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. εἰ δέ τις Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει, οὗτος οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῦ. 10 εἰ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, τὸ μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν διὰ ἁμαρτίαν, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ζωὴ διὰ δικαιοσύνην. 11εἰ δὲ τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ ἐγείραντος τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ νεκρῶν οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ ἐγείρας τὸν2 Χριστὸν3 ἐκ νεκρῶν ζωοποιήσει καὶ τὰ θνητὰ σώματα ὑμῶν, διὰ τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος αὐτοῦ Πνεύματος ἐν ὑμῖν.4 12 Ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, ὀφειλέται ἐσμέν, οὐ τῇ σαρκὶ, τοῦ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆν· 13 εἰ γὰρ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆτε, μέλλετε ἀποθνήσκειν· εἰ δὲ πνεύματι τὰς πράξεις τοῦ σώματος θανατοῦτε, ζήσεσθε. 14 ὅσοι γὰρ Πνεύματι Θεοῦ ἄγονται, οὗτοι εἰσιν υἱοὶ Θεοῦ. 15 οὐ γὰρ ἐλάβετε πνεῦμα δουλείας πάλιν εἰς φόβον, ἀλλ̓ ἐλάβετε πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας, ἐν ᾧ κράζομεν, Αββα ὁ πατήρ.
The mind governed by the flesh is death,but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace.7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.Therefore, brothers we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. 13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. 14 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God. 15 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”
Yet this is what is strangest of all about the Stromata. In the line that now immediately precedes this clear citation, Clement 'adds back in the reference.' As we have already noted, it is impossible to believe that Romans 8:11 was originally there. Nevertheless it has been added to Stromata Book 3.
We must remember that Clement is originally arguing against the heretical interpretation of the material in Romans chapters 7 and 8. However - and scholars always lose sight of this (and it is surprising that they lose sight of this given the 'controversy' involving 'Secret Mark') - Clement and the heretics agree about Paul citing a passage from the gospel which no longer appears in our gospels. In other words, they are agreeing about a Marcionite paradigm (i.e. Paul having a gospel) but disagreeing about its application. It is no wonder then that we should suspect that some later apologist for Clement (= Eusebius) might have done some 'correcting' work at this critical juncture.
Our only surviving manuscript of the Stromata has already had Clement acknowledge that while Jesus is addressing the rich man he adds a commandment or 'law' of his own - 'thou shalt not lust.' Clement however disputes the heretical assumption that Christians cannot marry and must castrate themselves. He goes on to write that:
He (Paul) says, "What shall we say? Is the Law sin? Of course not. But I did not know sin except through the Law. I did not know lust, except that the Law said, ‘You shall not lust.’" (Rom 7.7) If the heretics who assail the creator suppose that Paul was speaking against him in the words that follow: "I know that nothing good lodges in me, in my flesh, that is to say," (Rom 7:18) they had better read the words which precede and come after these. He has just said, "Sin lodges in me," which makes it appropriate to go on to, "Nothing good lodges in my flesh." (Rom 7:17 - 18) On top of this he continues, "If I act contrary to my will, the effect is not mine but the effect of sin lodging in me," which, he says, "is at war with" God’s "Law and my own reason and takes me prisoner under the Law of sin which is in my very bones. What a wretched man I am. Who will rescue me from this body which is doomed to death?" (Rom 7.20, 23-4) Once again, since he never remotely gets tired of doing good, he does not hesitate to add, "The Law of the Spirit has freed me from the Law of sin and death," since through his Son "God has pronounced judgment upon sin in the flesh so that the Law’s ordinance might find fulfillment in us, whose lives are governed by the Spirit not by the flesh." (Rom 8.2-4) In addition to all this, he makes what he has already said even clearer by asserting at the top of his voice, "The body is a dead thing because of sin," (Rom 8.10) showing that if it is not the soul’s temple it remains the soul’s tomb. (1 Cor 3. 16) When it is consecrated to God, he is going to continue, "the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lodges in you, and he will give life even to your mortal bodies through his indwelling Spirit." (Rom 8.11) So again he attacks the hedonists and adds, "The object of the flesh is death, since those whose lives are governed by the flesh follow the flesh in their objectives; and the object of the flesh is hostility to God, for it is not subject to God’s Law. Those who live on the level of flesh cannot please God" should not be understood as some people lay down, but as I have already argued. Then in distinction from these people, he addresses the Church. "You are not living by the flesh but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God is dwelling in you. Anyone without Christ’s Spirit is not of him. But if Christ is in you, then your body is a dead thing because of sin, but the Spirit is life through righteousness. So, brothers, we are in debt. Not to the flesh, to follow it in our lives; for if you follow the flesh in the way you live, you are on the way to death. But if by the Spirit you put to death the practices of the body, you will live. For all who are guided by God’s Spirit are sons of God."
The point of course is that there is a continuous citation of text. Clement is going out of his way to go through, line by line, the Apostolikon held in common by him and the heretics.
The emboldened material marks a break in that natural flow. It is interesting that the first part of the citation of Romans 8 - "the body is a dead thing because of sin' does appear in the next citation but "the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lodges in you, and he will give life even to your mortal bodies through his indwelling Spirit" does not. Scholars of course just comment that 'Clement has a strange way of citing scripture' but this is unacceptable. Everything here points to the fact that a later hand has added a point to emphasize Clement's (alleged) orthodoxy.
What is the point being made here? Well look carefully at what is being emphasized. The editor has Clement going out of his way to say that (a) the body "is not the soul’s temple it remains the soul’s tomb" and (b) by retaining Romans 8:11 which again does not appear in Clement's original citation which follows the emphasis again is on Jesus's resurrection rather than the heretical gospels' (= Secret Mark's) idea of a beloved disciple being resurrected from the dead. We can at least partially leave the contentious issue of Secret Mark for a moment and instead focus on the first point. Why is it so important for the editor to stress the idea that the body is still a tomb for the individual who has apparently received the sacrament of baptism? The answer should be obvious.
The heretical argument is clearly that because the initiates have been 'baptized into death' they are free from the Law and also are now 'perfect' - not only of mind but of flesh too. This idea appears not only in the heretical writings but also in Clement's own hand. It was the Catholic Church which put forward a resurrection of the body at the end of time, something rejected by Marcionites. Clement must have held the same position - or was thought to hold this position - and so Eusebius or whoever edited the Stromata went out of his way to add the missing text of 8:11 along with the emphasis that the 'perfect' are not already in possession of perfect 'spiritual' flesh.
Notice also that the existing manuscripts of Clement punctuate the sentence as follows:
τὸ μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν δι' ἁμαρτίαν δηλῶν ὡς ὅτι μὴ νεώς, τάφος δ' ἐστὶν ἔτι τῆς ψυχῆς· ὁπηνίκα γὰρ ἁγιασθῇ τῷ θεῷ, τὸ πνεῦμα, ἐποίσει, τοῦ ἐγείραντος ἐκ νεκρῶν Ἰησοῦν οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν
"The body is a dead thing because of sin," showing that if it is not the soul’s temple it remains the soul’s tomb. When it is consecrated to God, he is going to continue, "the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead lodges in you, and he will give life even to your mortal bodies through his indwelling Spirit."
I think we should prefer "showing that if it is not the soul’s temple it remains the soul’s tomb when it is consecrated to God."
dating back to conversations with his grandfather, Gaston Frank. "He said we represent one of the last descendants of the Frankist Jewish faith in the world," he muses. "I grew up thinking that our family was something like the Last of the Mohicans."